Text
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The punishment of the lower court (the punishment of imprisonment of two years and six months, the order to complete a sexual assault treatment program 80 hours, and the order to disclose or notify each five years) is too unfasible and unfair.
B. The lower court’s dismissal of the Defendant’s request for an attachment order even if the Defendant’s request for an attachment order is sufficiently likely to recommit a sexual crime.
2. Determination
A. The crime of this case on the assertion of unfair sentencing is a situation unfavorable to the defendant, where the defendant committed a indecent act by force on two occasions, following the defendant's belief that he was a usual child, and the nature of the crime is inferior. The crime of this case appears to have suffered a considerable mental suffering, and the victim and his family members were sentenced to imprisonment for a period of two years and six months due to the crime of causing rape, and the defendant committed a robbery, injury by robbery, etc., or three times or more, and there are records of having been sentenced to a sentence of imprisonment.
On the other hand, it is difficult to view that the lower court’s punishment is excessively unreasonable, taking into account the following factors: (a) the Defendant led to the confession of all of his own crimes from the beginning of the investigation; (b) the victim’s mother does not want the punishment by agreement with the victim; (c) the degree of tangible power exercised in the course of the crime of indecent act by force; (d) the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for larceny on October 6, 200; and (e) the Defendant has lived in good faith without any special previous conviction after being sentenced to eight months; and (e) the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, the circumstances leading to the instant crime, and all the circumstances after the crime
Therefore, this part of the prosecutor's argument is without merit.
B. The risk of recidivism of a sexual crime under Article 5(1) of the Act on the Probation and Electronic Monitoring, etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders, which is judged on the part of the request for attachment order, is not enough to repeat the crime, and the person who requested attachment order commits a sexual crime again in the future.